[REJECTED] Tag implication: magazine_request -> magazine_scan

create implication magazine_request -> magazine_scan

Link to implication

If you use the magazine request tag, you probably mean to ask what magazine an image was scanned from. I really doubt anyone would use this tag for an in-image object.

EDIT: The tag implication magazine_request -> magazine_scan (forum #147272) has been rejected by @Hillside_Moose.

-1 Magazine scan says it comes from the inside of a magazine (as opposed to magazine cover). Whereas magazine request says what magazine a scan comes from, not whether it's the cover page or interior pages.

The tag implication magazine_request -> magazine_scan (forum #147272) has been rejected by @Hillside_Moose.

BrokenEagle98 said:

-1 Magazine scan says it comes from the inside of a magazine (as opposed to magazine cover). Whereas magazine request says what magazine a scan comes from, not whether it's the cover page or interior pages.

But wouldn't a magazine cover have the magazine's name, effectively making magazine request pointless for a cover image?

The bottom-line is that the above two tags are very loosely joined IMO with a high degree of uncertainty as to whether they are truly hierarchical. I'm in doubt myself which is why I voted in the negative. Implications/aliases are a huge thing, and they're not easy to reverse, nor are they easy to clean up after if mistakes are made.

remove implication holding_cup -> drinking_glass

Link to request

Please do this as soon as possible @Hillside_Moose

EDIT: Uhm, was supposed to end up in topic #15277 but whatever.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1786 (forum #150048) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.

The bulk update request #1786 (forum #150048) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.